Jump to content

Are Sikhs addicted to appeasing "others" at their own cost


Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, GurjantGnostic said:

Treating the injured prisoners of other forces well is the sign of any civilized people. It doesn't really return soldiers back to fight for the enemy so much as protect your forces from degrading themselves with poor behavior and secure a legacy even in the minds of your enemies what a civilized people you are. It does play well in history and help greatly with doplomacy once you're victorious. 

Genghis Khan didn't think like that and was pretty successful.  

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 108
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

You could be a big Singh too, who's docile. Then they're probably thinking "Oh these are the canon fodder we used. Bravo." I remember a few years ago some english twat in the pub saying, "Sikhs were t

Usually, in the above particular example, that surface public image tends to conceal a darker reality. But in our case in recent times we've adopted this demeanour not because we're genuine Nice Guys,

https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/coventrys-langar-aid-rallies-feed-21446995 Coventry's Langar Aid rallies to feed Afghan refugees arriving at Birmingham Airport "Lan

I was recently reading this account of Sikh conflicts during Sikh raj, and this one fundamentalist 'Syed' who'd kept instigating jeehads against the Sikhs (in NWFP area). Anyway, he was thorn in the Sikh side and they had to continually send forces to quell his 'rebellions'. In the end they quashed him. And do you know what the Sikhs did afterwards: They located his body on the field and then burnt it.   

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dallysingh101 said:

I was recently reading this account of Sikh conflicts during Sikh raj, and this one fundamentalist 'Syed' who'd kept instigating jeehads against the Sikhs (in NWFP area). Anyway, he was thorn in the Sikh side and they had to continually send forces to quell his 'rebellions'. In the end they quashed him. And do you know what the Sikhs did afterwards: They located his body on the field and then burnt it.   

yep that will send a definite message to them that sikhs will send you to jahanum if you mess with them .

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dallysingh101 said:

I was recently reading this account of Sikh conflicts during Sikh raj, and this one fundamentalist 'Syed' who'd kept instigating jeehads against the Sikhs (in NWFP area). Anyway, he was thorn in the Sikh side and they had to continually send forces to quell his 'rebellions'. In the end they quashed him. And do you know what the Sikhs did afterwards: They located his body on the field and then burnt it.   

That's what you do with trash. 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest
On 8/1/2021 at 9:33 PM, dallysingh101 said:

Genghis Khan didn't think like that and was pretty successful.  

we follow Guru Gobind Singh not Genghis Khan.  Who do you follow?

the mongols ended up becoming buddhists in the end.

same with with the roman empire- it fell apart while Jesus's teachings flourished, even though it was based on non-violence.

in the end Dharma alway wins.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Guest guest said:

we follow Guru Gobind Singh not Genghis Khan.  Who do you follow?

the mongols ended up becoming buddhists in the end.

same with with the roman empire- it fell apart while Jesus's teachings flourished, even though it was based on non-violence.

in the end Dharma alway wins.

I think you missed my point, it was simply regarding the universally accepted definition of 'warrior' - not who I follow. My point was that they don't always follow strict moral codes (like sant-sipahis).  

I have no idea what happened to the Mongols, I know some of their descendants converted to islam and ended up ruling india.  

Dharam needs to be upheld. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest
On 8/8/2021 at 8:48 AM, dallysingh101 said:

I think you missed my point, it was simply regarding the universally accepted definition of 'warrior' - not who I follow. My point was that they don't always follow strict moral codes (like sant-sipahis).  

I have no idea what happened to the Mongols, I know some of their descendants converted to islam and ended up ruling india.  

Dharam needs to be upheld. 

not concerned with what 'they' do.  it has no relevance.  "ends justify the means" is not a sikh concept at all.  sadly can see that alot of hindus and western christians seem to think chicanery, machinations and brute violence      are acceptable, no doubt some 'sikhs' do too.  

the mongols are not the same as the mughals.  and the mughuls never 'ruled' India- all they did was try to control it with violence.  that failed in the end too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest sikhs
On 8/1/2021 at 9:32 PM, dallysingh101 said:

I've heard after the desecration of Harmandir Sahib by Abdali (or some wretched tonda), Sikhs slaughtered a bunch of sullay there, and used prisoners to clean up the defiled sarowar.  

imo those sikhs aught to be denounced

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest
On 8/1/2021 at 9:55 PM, dallysingh101 said:

I was recently reading this account of Sikh conflicts during Sikh raj, and this one fundamentalist 'Syed' who'd kept instigating jeehads against the Sikhs (in NWFP area). Anyway, he was thorn in the Sikh side and they had to continually send forces to quell his 'rebellions'. In the end they quashed him. And do you know what the Sikhs did afterwards: They located his body on the field and then burnt it.   

imo those sikhs and their actions should be denounced

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest
On 8/1/2021 at 6:08 PM, MisterrSingh said:

History... written... victors... etc.

Losers of wars are seldom provided the courtesy of constructing the narrative and terms of their defeat. If anything they're demonised and humiliated, and accused of doing the very feats they were at pains to avoid.

this doesn't seem true to me anywhere in the world.  Greeks, Romans (Virgil), Old Testament, our Sikh history, Tolstoy (Russia vs Napolean) even recent history like holocaust survivors and Germans and Japanese post war.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/13/2021 at 1:43 PM, Guest guest said:

imo those sikhs and their actions should be denounced

Maybe born in Sikh parivaar but not yet Sikh. We welcome all type of voices but there is always a line not to cross. Unfortunately, our folks are wearing blindfolds and crossing that line multiple times.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use